House debates

Thursday, 10 August 2006

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation Amendment (Export Control and Quarantine) Bill 2006

Second Reading

11:39 am

Photo of Tony WindsorTony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation Amendment (Export Control and Quarantine) Bill 2006. I listened to the speech by the member for Capricornia, and I was particularly impressed with the comments she made towards the end of it. I thought her speech was very good, in total. She highlighted a very important point about the broader issue of quarantine and biosecurity when she related the experiences of Canada when it had an outbreak of mad cow disease and the costs that were incurred by that economy through what was, in a sense, a lack of vigilance. The figure she cited was something like $6.6 billion having been lost to that economy and, essentially, to the beef industry, and that has had a multiplier effect on the broader economy.

I have just spent some time in Canada looking at ethanol plants and some other things. One issue that was raised when I was there was the impact of the BSE outbreak on the Canadian economy. This highlights the point that we really do need to be vigilant in relation to quarantine and biosecurity. That may, from time to time, be seen as being a little protectionist by some who would rather just open the door to the free market and let the market flow. We are seeing that with a number of products at the moment—apples, cooked chicken meat and other variations of a similar theme. Because of various trading arrangements with others internationally and talks that are ongoing with the World Trade Organisation and others about trying to liberalise overseas markets for access of our products, in some cases there has to be a relaxation of the way in which we accept other products. I suggest that, once again, we need to be vigilant in how we go about those processes. If there are any risks at all, we should not give up our greatest agricultural advantage as a nation—that of being an island, of being a clean, green producer of food and of not being subject to some of the diseases that some of our competitors internationally are. We should not enter into an arrangement if there is any degree of risk.

That leads me to the debate on today’s legislation, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation Amendment (Export Control and Quarantine) Bill 2006. I support the legislation, but you can see a number of issues across the agricultural spectrum at the moment. The New South Wales Farmers Association and the National Farmers Federation have some issues with AQIS and some biosecurity problems. We have seen in recent years the possibility of the importation of cooked chicken meat from parts of Asia. More recently, we have seen the outbreak of avian influenza and how that could possibly have an impact further down the track. A number of years ago—when I was still in the New South Wales parliament—it looked as though cooked chicken meat was going to come in from Thailand. A number of political players at the time were quite upset about that because of not only its impact on regional economies but also the possibility of disease coming in with the various heating arrangements. I cannot remember all the detail, but certain guarantees were given that the meat had been cooked to a certain temperature to prevent disease outbreaks in Australia. Then along came avian influenza.

Thankfully that issue has gone away for the moment, but those continued pressures between global trade operators will return. As I said, we have to be very vigilant in how we go about addressing some of these issues. I am a member of the House Standing Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, and I am pleased to see that other very diligent members of that committee are here today. I look forward to their contributions.

I would like to read from a few press releases. The New South Wales Farmers Association on Wednesday, 19 July, headlined a press release with: ‘Farmers call for Senate Inquiry into national quarantine system’. It reads:

New South Wales Farmers’ Association today voted at their annual conference to call for an urgent Senate Inquiry into Australia’s Quarantine System, AQIS and Biosecurity Australia in order to stimulate public debate on how a better system could be established for all Australians.

Chair of the New South Wales Farmers’ Association’s Quarantine and Exotic Diseases Committee, Peter Carter

who is a fairly quiet individual, as I am sure that those who know him would verify—

says that an independent inquiry by the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Senate Committee is needed to ensure our disease and pest free status is not being compromised by a system that doesn’t work.

They are fairly strong words. Mr Carter is a vet by profession. He has been involved with the New South Wales Farmers Association for many years and is a man whom I respect and who I believe has some knowledge of these issues. That that organisation and that committee chair are making those comments is something this House and the parliament should take on board. The press release went on:

“Agriculture won’t stand for the government doing an internal review of the import risk analysis system—the architects of the system should not judge their own system,” Mr Carter said.

“Getting the import protocols right is far too important to agriculture—if the bureaucrats get it wrong and disease comes in, it is the farmer who has to pay to clean up the pest or the disease mess, loses market opportunities or wear the higher production costs,” Mr Carter said.

There is a hint of warning there. A similar document on 26 June has the National Farmers Federation expressing some concerns about AQIS’s operation and biosecurity, highlighting the fact that we have to make more than sure that there are no risks if we start to break down some of the boundaries and allow other product into our nation, particularly product that we can produce domestically.

An issue I have raised in the parliament on a number of occasions—and there have been a number of meetings with ministers over the years—relates to a constituent of mine who runs a business called Angora City (Rabbits) Pty Ltd. The issue concerns the importation of rabbits into Australia and the dealings between different companies. In my view—and I have mentioned this before, so it is not news—Mr Warwick Grove, who is the director of Angora City (Rabbits) and who has established a plant, Guyra, in my electorate, has been appallingly treated by the system. He has not had the concerns that he has raised over a number of years dealt with sufficiently at a ministerial or a parliamentary level. I would ask that the issues that I am about to raise are considered. I also ask that this document be tabled so that others can look at it and give consideration to it. On 1 August, Mr Grave wrote to all members of parliament, so most members would have seen this. In his letter he wrote:

Dear Member of Parliament

I refer to my previous allegations of an “illegal” US Import into Australia on 4th November 1998 that had major ramifications for my company.

The Independent Government Doolan Enquiry into this matter was “all sorted out” prior to the release of the Terms of Reference on 16 July 2003. I first met with the then Executive Director of AQIS on 30th May 2003 in Sydney. I understand she has been “dishonourably discharged” (to quote a Senator). As such, I restate, I will not be going to the Ombudsman.

I think there had been suggestion that is Mr Graves should take his issues to the Ombudsman and whomever else. He went on:

There has been no reply from the past three Minister of Agriculture, Hon J Anderson, Hon W Truss and currently Hon P McGauren. Thank you to all members of parliament and senators who took the time to reply.

I enclose recent correspondence to Hon J Howard (Prime Minister) dated 18 April 2006—and 17 July 2006 ... I enclose letter to US Embassy dated 17 July 2006.

I state there have been two distinct standards by AQIS re the same animal import—

‘animal import’ meaning rabbit—

one from the USA and one from the EU. AQIS will be held to account as QUARANTINE DOES MATTER.

The Quarantine Forum in Canberra (Old Parliament House) on Friday 14 July 2006 was by Invitation Only. I could have organised many people to tell the real story of quarantine—the total and absolute—

I cannot pronounce the word he has here and it is probably best I do not try—

... disregard for due process. Also I was advised all agricultural groups were represented—regrettably the F.R.I.A. was excluded.

I seek a fair and just resolution. I assure you all, Quarantine Does Matter. My allegations are factual and based on original government documents.

Thank you for your time in considering this matter.

Yours sincerely

Warwick S Grave

Director

He is the director of Angora City Rabbits Pty Ltd. I ask that I be able to table these documents.

Leave granted.

The appropriate ministers would have seen these documents. But, if there are any members of parliament who have not seen the documents, they may find them extremely interesting in terms of an individual’s wrestle with the system—the way in which his application to import rabbits was treated, the trail of missing documents and the people who delayed things for a whole range of reasons, compared another company that was able to import rabbits at a similar time and its treatment—and also very much so that we can learn from any mistakes there may be in that process so that individuals and businesses such as Mr Grave’s who are trying to do the right thing in Australia are not treated in a shabby fashion.

I will conclude my comments with the comment I started with. In terms of biosecurity we have to make sure we are ever vigilant, that we do not allow ourselves to be compromised in any way and that we do not allow ourselves to be pressured politically by international forces in our trading relations. We saw what happened in Canada, with the massive loss of potential income when they were an active trader in the beef market. We have seen what can happen in the other parts of the world with the outbreak of some of these diseases. The one comparative advantage we have, which is that we are quite distinct from any other nation in the world, is geared around our being a nation continent. We must maintain the integrity of our food supplies both within that continent and on our borders.

We have a preoccupation to a certain extent with people coming here on leaky boats. We are debating legislation on that today and I think we will be voting on it in a very short time. At the same time we seem to be moving towards a process of relaxing our integrity in terms of biosecurity. We have to make sure that people who are involved on the ground—people like Peter Carter from the New South Wales Farmers Association—are involved in the decision-making process. It should not be left to a group of public servants. Well intentioned though they may be, they will be subjected to greater political pressure from other forces when the focus should be on the integrity of our national boundaries in terms of some of these diseases.

Comments

No comments